User talk:Fuhghettaboutit

——————————————— TALK PAGE ———————————————

Translation
Useful language dump
Corrections spreadsheet
Archive1: December 2005
Archive2: January 31, 2006
Archive3: February 18, 2006
Archive4: March 19, 2006
Archive5: March 27, 2006
Archive6: April 21, 2006
Archive7: May 21, 2006

If you leave a comment for me below I will comment back here as well, but I might also duplicate on your talk page, depending on context or if you request.

---

Thank you Newbie Helper!

I, DanielBC, award Fuhghettaboutit a smiley for helping me as a newbie. Cheers mate!

You're welcome, and thanks for the smiley:-)--Fuhghettaboutit 22:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Alright thanks. Wont happen again. user:slapslapslap

Trabancos River

Great Job!

Thanks for the complete an brilliant translation

Oh! And I like much your image of Sisyphus, I am very identify with he ;)

--Locutus Borg File:Logo-Borg.gif, Talk to me 22:29, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I had some help, from both you and another user! It still needs some work with the language but I hope to take it to a peer review process at some point. I'm glad you like it and thanks for the brilliant compliment!--Fuhghettaboutit 22:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the help on editing! Twenex 22:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome--Fuhghettaboutit 22:51, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

subst:welcomeg

Hiya! I was loitering around in the toolkit, watching people make edits (well, watching for vandalism and other nastiness, really) and one of your edit summaries caught my eye:

User User:Fuhghettaboutit copyvio? User talk:Mm1983 (4447) "subst:welcomeg"

While it's absolutely wonderful to welcome people, when they (eventually) learn to check the page history, it might be a little disheartening to learn that the welcome message they got was cookie-cutter. This is just my opinion on the matter, of course, but might I suggest using "Welcome to Wikipedia!" or "Welcoming our brand new editor!" instead?

If you'd like, I've got a personal {{welcomeg}} that I use: User:Kylu/welcome, I like the fact that it's custom and shows that I'm personally putting some effort into welcoming users. If you like it (well, other than the graphic and color scheme, they might be a little too girly for you? :D) you're welcome to it! I doubt you need help in editing the template, from what I see of your userpage, and certainly you've got a mass more seniority here than I do, but if you'd like help translating the weird markup I used, please ask. :)

Take care!

~Kylu (u|t) 04:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Kylu. Thanks for the thoughtful message. Yeah, I would definitely need to change it navy blue and put a muscle car where the heart is (hee). Actually, I've thought about making a personal welcome template and modeling it off of welcomeg but it's never struck me as vital. The thing is, if it's your own template, it's still a template. The important part for me, is that when someone sees the part in that template (other any other welcome template) about feeling free to ask me on my talk page for help and they do so, then they get a full personal response and whatever help I can offer. I guess what I'm saying is that the welcomeg is akin to form letter (with lots of useful information), while a personal welcome template is still a form letter but which you personally signed—I'm not sure the difference is that vast when the text is still the same for each person you welcome with it, after all you didn't do anything personalized with respect to that person or any action of that person. I think you're right though that I should reform my edit summaries. Maybe that's the way to make it even more personal than a personalized welcome template could: leave an edit summary like "Again, welcome, and if you need any help feel to drop me a message on my talk page." Oh by the way, I'm sure it makes sense and I'm just missing it, but I'm befuddled by the part of your message about my name and "copyvio?". Feel free to drop me a message anytime.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

HCOTM

Thanks for letting me know, I've registered my vote for JC. Been putting a bit more work into WP lately, so I'll be happy to collaborate on an article. Geoff B 23:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Great! Hopefully by midnight we'll have a clear winner. Thanks for the quick response.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Good call on messaging the WikiHorror participants, we don't seem to have many voting for the collaboration out of the two dozen or so members we have. Geoff B 01:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the collaboration vote

Hey thanks for the warm reception and invite! I voted for Carpenter just because I do have a soft spot for The Thing and Starman. Say do you guys do books too? I am somewhat shocked (alright just slightly bothered) to see how short the article is on the Exorcist, my all-time favorite horror novel. Plus, no entry for Salem's Lot the tv movie?! Here I was working on wikipedia articles that are, you know, about reality and discover that all this great stuff is not even covered or badly covered. As for future collaborations, I think these two rank pretty high. Anyway, once the voting done, I'll do my bit to help inform the general public about all the great entertainment that they should read about here first! Heh heh. Tombseye 06:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar - 12984 edits

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar I hereby award this Tireless Contributor Barnstar to Fuhghettaboutit for his 12984 edits!!!! Benjaminstewart05 17:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Benjamin! Thank you for the award, and live action too--I can just feel that throwing star rotating through the air as it arcs toward my neck. --Fuhghettaboutit 12:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

David Pittman

Hi, I'm a bit puzzled by this one. I remember the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael John Ainsworth incident (can visualise the picture in the article!). Ainswrrth was added to the Western Suburbs Magpies by the user 203.213.7.130 and I deleted the reference. But I can find no evidence that this user had anything to do with a David Pittman article and I have no memory of such an article. Maybe some random coincidence? The new article seems OK on first investigation. Dlyons493 Talk 08:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I was puzzled too--why would such a different name be a redirect to that article? and since it made my watchlist and was just created, it had to be previously deleted. Oh well. Sometimes mysterious things happen with the software although I'm imagining it is something like this: I placed a speedy tag on David Pittman, probably a db-empty because I would never nominate the current article's text for deletion. Mailer diablo then deleted Michael John Ainsworth followed by David Pittman but made an error in attribution with a copy and paste function. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit 08:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks for the warning about ianchatham. I'll put him on my watchlist so I can monitor his contributions, and advise/warn/block in sequence if necessary. jimfbleak 16:24, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm wiondering though if the massive, nonsense talk page edits should be reverted.--Fuhghettaboutit 16:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

WikiLove!

Here's a pizza for you! Pizzas promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others using Template:smile! Happy editing! LINUXERIST@ ~~~~~

John Carpenter

Thanks! I wasn't sure if I was supposed to respond on my talk page or yours. Anyway, it's my pleasure!

Sullenspice 22:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

With regard to where to respond--there is no set policy or even recommendation. Personally I believe that discussions should be able to be followed in one place, so once I say something on someone's talk page I always monitor there for a while, but others, probably correctly, believe that since leaving a comment on another's talk page gives them the "you have new messages" alert, it's always better to respond there; I split the baby by posting to both. If you have an technical editing problems as a newcomer (or for anything else), please feel free to drop me a line.--Fuhghettaboutit

---

Thank you from yesterday. Chris 20:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC) (moved from my userpage--Fuhghettaboutit)

You're welcome--Fuhghettaboutit 23:10, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Steve Van Wormer

Great minds think alike! :-D Thanks for your cleanup efforts, and the IMDB link. Cheers, FreplySpang 16:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the message! Your edits very closely resemble the ones I had attempted; "gmta" indeed. --Fuhghettaboutit 16:12, 3

June 2006 (UTC)

The Thing

I'm the one who was just editing The Thing. I had forgotten to log in!

Sullenspice 19:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

LOL! Yeah it was too constructive an edit for most ips (in my experience). Sorry for welcoming you! --Fuhghettaboutit 20:12, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I have a bad habit of occasionally forgetting to log in. Most of the edits I've made on Wikipedia are probably credited to the 4.172.... or 4.173.... ip rather than my account.

Sullenspice 20:17, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Werder

The city-town thing is a bit confusing, because the definitions in English and in German (Stadt) don't match exactly. A place with a town charter is called Stadt in German, and town or city in English. For categories, all towns bigger than 100,000 inhabitants are called "city" (see Category:Cities in Germany), all places smaller than 100,000, with or without town charter, are called "town". Actually towns over 100,000 are called Großstadt in German. The Brandenburg template shows districts and district-free cities/towns. Werder isn't district-free. Markussep 23:21, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Hmm hi I post an artical about some ideas such as Planor energy and Phillip Browning. The reason why no searches were found was due to that all this information is new and this is the first time it is being released. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mathforms05 (talk • contribs) .

Here's the thing: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It's not a primary source or even a secondary source. Encyclopedia articles are on subjects already well known--the standard is notability. I don't quite understand, are you Philip Brown, is he someone you know? He may be important, but for an encyclopedia he must be recognized as important by primary sources out in the world.--Fuhghettaboutit 01:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

IRAS Disambiguation

Fuhghettaboutit, I have a newbie question. Since you were kind enough to leave me a welcome note, I am directing it at you. I want to create a disambiguation page for the IRAS (Indian Railways Accounts Service) but the entry for the IRAS is a full article and not a redirection. How does one fix this. Do we normally move the article to an article with the full name? Rajat Bhargav

Hi Rajat. I see the problem. You need the IRAS name for the disambiguation name, but it is the article on Infrared Astronomical Satellite. As I see it, you have a couple of options. First, you can ask for an administrator to move the article IRAS to its full name, Infrared Astronomical Satellite, using the fact that articles should normally be under their full names, as well as the need for the IRAS disambiguation page as a basis. Normally you could just do that move yourself, but you need an administrator to make a move of a page where the page being moved to already exists, as is the case here (the software won't allow you to make a move where the destination is already taken). Note that you should never perform a move like this by hand, i.e. cutting and pasting the text of IRAS into its full name so you free up the page. By doing so, the article under the new name would lose its edit history. It's also always a good idea to seek consensus before making controversial page moves.

In order to request the move, you would follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Basically, it involves listing the requested move at that page with your rationale, and placing a template on the talk page of the existing article for IRAS which notes that you are requesting the move at Wikipedia:Requested moves, and duplicating your rationale text. If the article is moved after consensus is reached, then IRAS will become a redirect that you can make into the disambiguation page. Your second option is to simply place a header on the existing article for IRAS in the form found at Wikipedia:Disambiguation#Disambiguation links. This is certainly the easier option. It would look something like this (and see this in edit mode for the code I used):

This page is about the astronomical satellite. For the Government of India department which administers the finances of Indian railways, see Indian Railway Accounts Service.

This would at least inform people of this other use of the acronym IRAS. I also think you should move all of of your acronym articles to their full titles, the way I did to IRIMEE. If you don't know, when you move a page, it automatically make the prior name of the article a redirect to the new name, so you don't have to worry about making the redirects by hand (this is also the reason the software won't allow you to move a page where both names already exist). I hope all this helps. Cheers. --Fuhghettaboutit 15:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the excellent and detailed explanation. Will do the needful. Rajat Bhargav 20:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

John Carpenter Redux

Since you have been the other primary contributor to the JC article, I thought I'd let you know about the limitations of what I can contribute, so that other sections can be taken up by different contributors.

The JC films that I can write about with some authority are ASOP 13, The Fog, and The Thing. I've written about all three, and I still need to slightly expand, fine-tune, and add refs. to the latter two. I'll continue to edit, and I can clean up other contributor's prose if need be, but I think I've just about reached my limit for adding content.

Sullenspice 13:36, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks for that. I've been folowing that user's edits but didn't see that one. Thank you, Yanksox 04:19, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I feel slow, but I learned a new term. Yanksox 04:21, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Great. By the way--you are the quickest archivist I've ever seen---I was going to post something on your talk page regarding these responses, as I went to bed before I could respond last night--poof, already archived.--Fuhghettaboutit 11:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

MyOODB

Fuhghettaboutit I am the owner of MyOODB copyright. I am also a newbie to how to create wiki. I believe how I created MyOODB wiki was ok.

As is stated in the copyright notice on the article, if you hold the copyright to this material, please indicate so on the article's talk page and under the article's listing on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 June 10/Articles. That will inform the reviewing administrator of your concern. I invite you to review Wikipedia:Copyright problems which states in relevant part that:

Copyright owners who submitted their own work to Wikipedia: If you submitted work to Wikipedia which you had previously published (especially online), and your submission was marked as a potential infringement of copyright, stating that you are the copyright holder of the work on the article's talk page helps, but will not likely prevent deletion. It is sufficient to:

• Make a note permitting reuse under the GFDL at the site of the original publication.
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions at wikimedia dot org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation.

On a separate front, even if the article had no copyright violation, I would likely have proposed it for deletion. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free advertisement service. The criteria we use is notability, as in the subjects of articles must be notable. Please review What Wikipedia is not; especially the section on Wikipedia not being a soapbox. As far as I can tell, your product may be useful or even brilliant, but it is not notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Your website/the software name only returns 130 unique google hits, for instance, as one test of notability.--Fuhghettaboutit 20:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit I understand. My apologies. I am not trying to push MyOODB, its simple a tool that I thought fit in wiki since I saw other type tools here. I understand notable. I will request MyOODB for removal. Please note however that when I search google for "object-oriented database & web services", MyOODB often is the third link.

Thanks and Regards...

Thanks for unsderstanding. Best of luck.--Fuhghettaboutit 21:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit, my apologies but one more question. How long does it take to take down the article? The copyright violation page when searching give the impression that I have done something really wrong. I would really like to see it removed.

Artentainment

Moved to AFD. Ral315 (talk) 05:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

stop this vandal please

205.188.117.6 "BEATLEWILL" This user has repetedly used a main article page to use it for a forum to rant his "opinions" (not facts) - it has already been reverted to the talk or discussion page where is belongs by a wise monitor/editor. But he refuses to take heed and puts up the same "disputes" and "opinion pieces" on a main subject page. THis is esp. true for the article on ART LORIA where the article shows his contributions to the music industry and is sourced, referenced and cited and properly formated.

Then 205.188.117.6 "BEATLEWILL" will come along and deface the article and rant about his opinions on his particular taste in music. Seems that because Mr. Loria was a "DOO WOP" performer, this vandal who has a more un-flattering for that genre of music, rather would share his opionin of the Beatles instead. BEATLEWILL even calims to be a spokesperson foe the Beatles and offers statements on what Yoko Ono or Psul McCartney would have to say. This is a disgrace! But totally acceptable if placed in the right forum. He has been corrected officially once, warned several times, but his banter continues.

That is is right and opinion of course - we just ask that he not be allowed to deface and disgrace an article main page in doing so. It takes away from the integrity of the music, theartist and WIKIPEDIA. Please follow the history of this user and look into this matter / complaint I have discussd. I'm doing research for a book and this is getting quite annoying. I'm not interested in his opinions of the Beatles, I'm interested in certain Doo Wop artists - it is greatly appriciated.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doowopoldies1 (talk • contribs) .

I see you asked this question of a number of other editors. As they advised, that ip is assigned to AOL and has multiple users. Others have also stated they will monitor the ip for vandalism, including an administrator. Unfortunately, it is sometimes difficult to deal with ip addresses that are registered to multiple users.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

RfA/Gurch

Hi again! Thanks for the support, and I'm glad to hear the spreadsheet turned out to be useful – Gurch 17:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Jesse Kramer

Thx. It's not G4 as both previous deletions were speedies. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 06:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Spanish

Hi F, thanks again for helping with the cookie, I do hope he gets a warm fuzzy glow :) I'd be happy to help with your project if I can! As you no doubt noticed, I'm currently lacking both experience and confidence. Assisting a more experienced editor in an area where I can't screw up too bad seems like a great way to get started. I'll review the translation and get back to you, but it's dinner-time here, hopefully followed with some Quality Family Time, so please don't hold your breath waiting for me :) Happy Editing! Doc Tropics 23:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I would love it if you reviewed the article for errors but note that some text has been modified and added to with outside research. I wasn't necessarily requesting this however; rather I was hoping to add you to my list of people to call on if I get into trouble with difficult passages in the future. I just posted the article as an example of translation efforts.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your NCH reply on searching edit history for text

...though the prospect seems daunting! First, though, I'll wait a few days for possible follow-up on the Discussion in which I raised the problematic matter. Even if the original editor doesn't respond, someone else might make a pertinent contribution and I'll be able to proceed with the edit I have in mind. -- Deborahjay 01:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi again Deborahjay. Always glad to lend a hand. Cheers!--Fuhghettaboutit 03:30, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe

...I forgot to log in before adding (minor) content to the Siberian iris. D'oh! Should I correct this, and if so...how? Doc Tropics 18:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry about it at all (and it happens to us all ocassionally). Ips are allowed to edit as well. There is no way to correct it—you can't reallocate edits. However, if you make an additional change to that article, and you want to claim ownership of your prior anonymous edits, simply place in the edit summary (after noting your current changes, of course)--something like "Note unrelated to this edit: previous edits by 123.45.678 were by me as well, while not logged in." --Fuhghettaboutit 21:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Fuhg. Next time I add to that article I'll add the note you suggested as well :) Doc Tropics 22:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I may point you to AGF

Since you enjoy pointing out policies, I recommend you read WP:AGF If you don't want to have a discussion in a place you may not want to start one there. --Crossmr 03:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No, I don't enjoy pointing out policies. However, when a user makes an obvious assumption of bad faith, and bites a newcomer, which however much you stridently want to defend by not letting this useless debate end at the help desk, it was, I think they need to be informed of the policy—especially when they appear to be a new user, as you do. The irony of you pointing me to WP:AGF by not assuming your assumption of bad faith with a newcomer on their first post was in good faith is quite amusing!.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I was pointing out caution. There is a difference. You chose to make the comment about it in that space. You could have left your comment and made a comment on my talk page if you felt WP:BITE needed to be pointed out to me. --Crossmr 03:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

No, you stated your belief in no uncertain terms that the user was lying. I'm trying to see how that can be characterized as pointing out caution. However, I agree with you that it would have been better if I had commented on your talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I said "I don't believe..." I didn't say "An NBC producer wouldn't use an AOL address" I made it very clear in my first statement that it was just my belief. --Crossmr 04:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

either way I'm sure we both learned a lesson for next time. --Crossmr 04:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)